The U.S. pork sector is modeled to simulate the effects of alternative import levels on prices, production, consumption, farm receipts, and consumer expenditures. Over the 1983–1985 period, producers annually received $600 million less due to increasing imports than if imports had remained at the 1979–1982 average. Farm prices and slaughter were lower by $2.21 per hundredweight and 1.1 million head annually, respectively. Four simulations reflecting alternative import paths over the period 1986–1992 were examined. With lower imports (relative to current levels), production and farm prices rise significantly in the long run; consumers purchase less and pay more.

This study examines the motivation behind contracts and vertical integration in the pork industry, and simulates the effects of potential improvements in coordination. Incentives related to lowering costs of measuring and sorting hogs, and protecting against opportunistic behavior associated with specific assets, can result in hog quality improvements. A framework for simulating the effects of increased coordination through contracts and vertical integration was developed and used to evaluate potential improvements in leanness. Although simulations suggest only modest changes in pork prices and supplies, gains in consumers' surplus could be substantial for larger demand shifts due to quality improvements.

Although the negative externalities of large-scale hog production have been well studied, econometric estimates of its potentially positive labor markets effects are lacking. We use the geographic shifts in large-scale hog production between 1992 and 2007 to estimate such production's effects on local farm and nonfarm labor markets. We find that every additional 1000 head at large-scale facilities in a county generates 0.57 additional large-scale hog operation jobs, 0.04 fewer small-scale hog operation jobs, 0.16 fewer nonhog-related agricultural jobs, and 0.59 additional nonfarm jobs, for a total of 0.96 jobs. Our total estimate is lower than previous ones based on input-output modeling.

We investigate thinness of hog and pork markets in terms of quantity andrepresentativeness of negotiated transactions. Transactional volume impartsmarginally greater confidence in pricing precision for Iowa-SouthernMinnesota negotiated hogs than for the national carcass cut-out, suggestingthat contracts tying prices to the former rather than the latter may be morerepresentative of industry conditions. Extending mandatory price reportingto pork may remedy this discrepancy. Despite declining volume, terminal hogmarkets may price accurately off of Iowa-Southern Minnesota prices. Hogquality differentials across procurement methods are documented, and qualityof negotiated hogs is shown to decline with declining volume.

Environmental and social concerns about the use of capital-intensive agricultural technologies have fueled questions about the process, impact, and future direction of the system that is largely responsible for developing these technologies; that is, publicly funded agricultural research at U.S. land-grant universities. Although social scientists have analyzed the public agricultural research system and farmers' attitudes towards various capital-intensive agricultural technologies, there has been less research on farmers' attitudes toward publicly funded research that focuses specifically on lowerinput agricultural technologies that contribute to sustainability goals. This research examines farmers' attitudes toward publicly funded research on one such low-input technology, deep-bedded hoop structures for swine production. With lower capital costs and purported environmental and management advantages, hoop structures have been promoted to and adopted by growing numbers of Midwest swine producers. The study hypotheses draw on published theories of the treadmill of technology, and of innovation adoption and diffusion. Using a 1997 mail survey of Iowa swine producers (n = 298), we examined factors associated with producers' attitudes toward publicly funded research on hoop structures and found that 40% were supportive of the research, 40% were opposed, and 20% were undecided. Of the variables examined, the producer's assessment of hoop structures' contribution to sustainability, number of external knowledge sources about hoop structures, and formal education were each significantly related to support for publicly funded hoop-structure research. Two farm structure variables, marketings and percentage of income from farming, were not significantly related in this study. Future research on farmers' attitudes toward public sector agricultural research should take account of farmers' views of potential impacts of the specific technologies being researched and developed, and the nature of farmers' ties to the land-grant university system. This study clarifies the importance of farmers' perceptions and concerns about specific agricultural technologies in directing public agricultural research planning and policy toward broader sustainability goals.

Livestock production and manure handling decisions often have been treated in the literature as separate enterprises. Policymakers, too, have ignored the interactive nature of manure management by focusing on land application for nutrient disposal. This study outlines a systems approach to describe the interrelated decisions producers face, using examples from North Carolina and Iowa that show how producers' attitudes toward manure management lead them to handle manure differently in different regions. In North Carolina, nutrients in manure are “not wanted.” There are economic incentives to treat manure, thus reducing its nutrient content, and to apply it on as little land as possible. In Iowa, nutrients are “not wasted.” Producers conserve the nutrients in manure and use them more fully, applying manure to higher value crops such as corn. Policies that influence manure management can be made more effective by accounting for the differences in producers' incentives to waste or want the nutrients.